A perspective on Peopleflow 2

[1st fltsimguy 466]

Interesting idea to further enhance the peopleflow technology. Here is some perspective to think about.1. 3d people - does this help enhance airports? - generally most folks would agree that including static or 3d people provides life to an otherwise sterile apt. - recognize though that there often some sacrifices on "fps". I would suggest that the current control panel should at the very least there should be some ability to turn them on and off, which has been introduced.2. 3d moving people - does this help enhance airports? I think most would also agree that the introduction of moving people, similar to having birds, traffic and other moving features helps add life to the apt and scenery. Same issue as above there is a demand on your computer for this eye candy and there should be some ability to turn it on or off.3. Now the proposal for a higher definition of 3d and moving people. Now the suggestion is that this will raise the bar. Does this really enhance an apt any further than we already have. Other than "cute" or "isn't it nice", as a flight simmer do you really sit around an apt and to watch the people or are you there to fly? The only thing I notice is that when I start at the terminal or taxi into the terminal the inclusion of 3d people really matters. I see them briefly and like the life it adds to the terminal area environment. When I buzz the field I have to use a magnifying glass to see people so they really don't add much once i'm airborn. While there are some tools that make 3d figures possible and animated and do so efficiently there is/will still be further demand on your computer resources. So what price on your computer system and what price in terms of additional cost to products in terms of $$.In moving to a higher resolution and higher level of animation I would suggest that any introduction of more and greater 3d people should only be done with the inclusion of a configuration feature to allow a user to set the level of inclusion of 3d people, not just on and off, but in some order, # of people, animated or not, with tiers such as "0" number & animated, 25% number & animated, 50% number & animated, 75% number & animated and then full.cheers

[OzWhitey 3,353]

I think theyre great for increasing immersion at the gate. But i think orbx should focus more on just placing them airside. A lot of the airports have a lot of detail elsewhere that you'll never see in normal flight operations.

[Fox-Bat 31]

I agree with the OP – to me it doesn't really seem important or crucial to my sim needs – for example I don't buy airports just sceneries, aircraft and other flight utilities. Stuff like people or vehicle flow is not for me. But everyone has different needs - I am sure there is a lot of stuff in current software simulators and add-ons which some old timers might find unnecessary (types of clouds, sun glares, water, etc) – to them just a realistic flight model would have been good enough. These people would consider our needs to be ‘soft’ too – sceneries etc. The other thing is new tech will always be designed for new hardware, as it should be. So yeah I wouldn't mind the option to turn it off but I think in terms of the larger picture and the wider market – new users, better computers etc – this option may not be worth the cost to a developer.

[Guest]

Poepleflow is nice as long as you don't really look at it. It's really great to have something moving in the corner of your eye when you are taxing around, but I don't feel the need to get out of the plane and check those flow things out. The last time I was on the Orbx site I saw an announcement of Peopleflow 2 and the movie showed nothing else but... a dancing woman...? :( I think that's a waste or resources...

[St Mawgan 1,353]

Nothing makes FS look more like a game than badly drawn 'people' doing random things on a loop. Thank goodness it can be turned off.What's that line in Jurassic Park - Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.

[OzWhitey 3,353]

It's not great by 2012 animation standards, but if it's realistic i can cope with the loop. Airside seems sterile with no aes and no peopleflow. Loop is unrealistic, no movement even more so. Airside details is where the effort should be.There's other details that i would leave out - anything you need bob to see is kind of unnecessary if you're flying realistically e.g. Concrete muni has a nice painting on the wall of one of the buildings in town - but when could anyone see that from a plane under real-world operations?

[1st fltsimguy 466]

It's not great by 2012 animation standards, but if it's realistic i can cope with the loop. Airside seems sterile with no aes and no peopleflow. Loop is unrealistic, no movement even more so. Airside details is where the effort should be.There's other details that i would leave out - anything you need bob to see is kind of unnecessary if you're flying realistically e.g. Concrete muni has a nice painting on the wall of one of the buildings in town - but when could anyone see that from a plane under real-world operations?

Yes these summaries my point really well. I like a few people, I'm OK with some loopy movement, just to add some life but my focus is the flying. You know I had no idea there was a painting on a house downtown Concrete but then again I haven't "walked" the street.For me its the flying and having some nice scenery to look at out the window. Edited January 29, 2012 by 1st fltsimguy

[dogtrack 18]

Anyone fancy "seeing" their scenery from a different perspective may want to have a look here :- http://deltasimstudio.com You can have a lot of fun in the fjords and suchlike. There is both freeware & payware so you can try before you decide. FSX & FS9 catered for.